From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hoagland v. Springer

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Dec 17, 1962
39 N.J. 32 (N.J. 1962)

Opinion

Argued December 3, 1962 —

Decided December 17, 1962.

Appeal from Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Mr. Herman D. Michels argued the cause for defendant-appellant ( Mr. John E. Morris, on the brief; Messrs. Toner, Crowley, Woelper Vanderbilt, attorneys).

Mr. Francis M. Seaman argued the cause for plaintiff-respondent ( Mr. Sam Weiss, on the brief; Messrs. Seaman Clark, attorneys).

Mr. LeRoy H. Mattson argued the cause for defendant-respondent ( Messrs. Troast, Mattson Madden, attorneys).


The refusal of the trial court to vacate the service of summons on the defendant Cummins Diesel Michigan, Inc. is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Goldmann in the Appellate Division. 75 N.J. Super. 560 (1962).

Subsequent to the oral argument we were advised by agreement of counsel that on April 11, 1960 Cummins Diesel Michigan, Inc. recorded in the office of the County Clerk of Somerset County, New Jersey, the conditional sale contract between it and William C. Springer covering the diesel engine sold to Springer and installed by it in his Ford tractor. The tractor and the engine were made subject to the contract. Such action on defendant's part provides additional support for the conclusion that it was properly subjected to service of process of the Superior Court of this State.

HALL and HANEMAN, JJ., concurring in result.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN — 7.

For reversal — None.


Summaries of

Hoagland v. Springer

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Dec 17, 1962
39 N.J. 32 (N.J. 1962)
Case details for

Hoagland v. Springer

Case Details

Full title:ELMER T. HOAGLAND, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. WILLIAM C. SPRINGER…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Dec 17, 1962

Citations

39 N.J. 32 (N.J. 1962)
186 A.2d 679

Citing Cases

Wenzel v. Zantop Air Transport, Inc.

The increasing realism in such judicial determinations of questions of jurisdiction has been recognized with…

Van Eeuwen v. Heidelberg Eastern, Inc.

That HDAG has elected to market its products in the United States through the grant of exclusive…